The result was delete. Stifle ( talk) 10:14, 14 September 2008 (UTC) reply
She is just a reality show contestant who has done nothing of note apart from Survivor. Yes, she has been on two seasons, but precedent (and another one) shows that that is not enough. -- Scorpion 0422 01:00, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
What is the appropriate talk page to argue that the contestants who were selected by the producers to play a second time are just as noteworthy as the winners? Tell me what talk page exists for me to urge in favor of such? Yeldarb68 ( talk) 15:03, 13 September 2008 (UTC) reply
I say keep it up, it seems to generate traffic and is about a TV personality, whether you agree with the person's merits or not. I think Scorpion though made a good point when he said that it is for discussing the merits (or lackthereof) of an article. When it comes to lack of merits, I can't think of a better example then Shii Ann. Still, if the page is getting views, let it stay. If it isn't then oh well. I mean, you have said you have seen SURVIVOR SUCKS and know what the majority of people think about Shii Ann. Why not let the facts against her stay as well? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Whippletheduck ( talk • contribs) 03:22, 11 September 2008 (UTC) reply
Well, I've stopped doing that once I really GOT what this was about. It is a shame that posting stuff that was directly shown on the show is not good enough to be cited anymore....I mean, most of what I post millions of people saw. Oh well, I personally like it and since I still think you are one of the Shi Ann defenders I have gone up with on other websites, I am laughing. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Whippletheduck ( talk • contribs) 03:22, 11 September 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Stifle ( talk) 10:14, 14 September 2008 (UTC) reply
She is just a reality show contestant who has done nothing of note apart from Survivor. Yes, she has been on two seasons, but precedent (and another one) shows that that is not enough. -- Scorpion 0422 01:00, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
What is the appropriate talk page to argue that the contestants who were selected by the producers to play a second time are just as noteworthy as the winners? Tell me what talk page exists for me to urge in favor of such? Yeldarb68 ( talk) 15:03, 13 September 2008 (UTC) reply
I say keep it up, it seems to generate traffic and is about a TV personality, whether you agree with the person's merits or not. I think Scorpion though made a good point when he said that it is for discussing the merits (or lackthereof) of an article. When it comes to lack of merits, I can't think of a better example then Shii Ann. Still, if the page is getting views, let it stay. If it isn't then oh well. I mean, you have said you have seen SURVIVOR SUCKS and know what the majority of people think about Shii Ann. Why not let the facts against her stay as well? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Whippletheduck ( talk • contribs) 03:22, 11 September 2008 (UTC) reply
Well, I've stopped doing that once I really GOT what this was about. It is a shame that posting stuff that was directly shown on the show is not good enough to be cited anymore....I mean, most of what I post millions of people saw. Oh well, I personally like it and since I still think you are one of the Shi Ann defenders I have gone up with on other websites, I am laughing. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Whippletheduck ( talk • contribs) 03:22, 11 September 2008 (UTC) reply